Talk:Delete

RFD discussion: August–November 2018
I find this heading very confusing. Is the Delete entry actually nominated for deletion? And if so, what is the rationale? Or is the section heading an ill-formatted attempt at requesting deletion of the entries below? This, that and the other (talk) 11:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The original deletion rationale was put under "stop" below. — SGconlaw (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep the "key" (on a keyboard) sense in Delete per WT:LEMMING: oxforddictionaries.com:delete:noun has "command or key". I see no WT:CFI-based rationale for deletion: this is not a sum of parts. I see uses like "press Delete", with D capitalized. Furhermore, M-W:backspace has "also : the key pressed ...", and "backspace" is similar. The rationales for deletion found in Talk:eject are unconvincing to me; rationales can be found in post by Chuck Entz and Equinox. As for Chuck Entz argument: sure, an eject button could have various functions, but it does have a typical function, and more importantly, there is a sense referring to a button, so existence is not put into question, nor is a sum of parts argument sustained. As for the Equinox argument that says '... the word is better read as a verb than as a noun meaning "the kind of button that this button is': the word behaves like a noun, a complement of the verb "press" ("press Delete"), and therefore can hardly be understood as a verb. On yet another note, more for eject: "press eject" does not necessarily mean "press a button labeled 'eject'" as there can be a symbol rather than a word; "press eject" is to be read as "press the button that is indicated to perform ejection, whether by word, a symbol or other means". --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:18, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

fast forward

 * Keep Cambridge Advanced Learner's has it. One can find uses like (He set the fast forward to 2x but quickly realized that wouldn't fit his time frame.)
 * Yes, keep, Oxford has it too. DonnanZ (talk) 19:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, are you suggesting that we keep all the noun button senses? If not, we need some sort of way of distinguishing between those that should be kept and those that shouldn't, and right now I'm not seeing one. Note that, in theory, every key on a keyboard and every button on a device could have a noun sense (for example, "She hit the H on the keyboard repeatedly" – does that mean we should add the noun sense "A key on a keyboard that produces the letter h or H when pressed"?). — SGconlaw (talk) 16:59, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I looked at some of the others and did not find clear use as a noun for them. IOW, I used citations of collocations like '(PREP) DET rewind(s)' to determine noun use. I thought that attributive use (eg, play button) did not by itself justify calling it a noun. As much as I sympathize with the desire to simplify by going after classes of words, I think that individual words are normally the units to be included or excluded. DCDuring (talk) 21:43, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is really a situation of verifying individual terms. I have no doubt that the terms are verifiable. It is more like our "Criteria for inclusion" policy. In that case, we decided that, as a matter of policy, "[n]umbers, numerals, and ordinals over 100 that are not single words or are sequences of digits should not be included in the dictionary, unless the number, numeral, or ordinal in question has a separate idiomatic sense that meets the CFI". Similarly, is it desirable for us to create a noun sense for any word that might conceivably be the label for a key on a keyboard or button on a device? I don't think so. (Note that has a separate verb sense which is not challenged.) — SGconlaw (talk) 07:40, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The attestation would be of noun use with the definition in question, using grammatical tests: does it form a plural, accept modification by determiners, serve as a subject and an object of a verb and as an object of a preposition. I don't think it's necessary to do an RfV, but such attestation provides a fact base for decision-making. If you believe that our past practice of doing such attestation and grammatical testing (eg, for adjective PoS) is wrong in this and similar cases, it might be worth bringing it up at BP.DCDuring (talk) 17:20, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that noun use doesn't exist. I agree it does. My point is that we should decide as a matter of policy whether, despite such a sense existing, we should be including such usage in the Wiktionary. Potentially every key in a keyboard and every button on a device could be used in a noun sense (e.g, H: "A key on a keyboard producing an h or H when pressed"; start: "A button on a machine that causes it to begin operating when pressed"). That doesn't mean we should then add such senses to the Wiktionary, just as we decided that we would exclude:
 * numbers above 100 lacking any other idiomatic sense; and
 * senses along the line of "an occurrence of the word [word]" (see, for example, "Talk:selah"), because potentially any word can be used in this way.
 * — SGconlaw (talk) 18:02, 21 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I think we need to make a distinction between a fast-forward mode and the fast-forward button. "He set the fast forward to 2x" can only refer to the mode, not the button. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that the mode should be listed as a noun sense. — SGconlaw (talk) 03:58, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep the button sense of fast forward per WT:LEMMING: oxforddictionaries.com#1 has "control" and Macmillan#1 has "button". Also, "press fast forward" does not seem to be sum of parts; which parts? --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:51, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

fire

 * Abstain. Unlike other key or button senses, e.g. for pause, this is not in lemmings, it seems: . Furthermore, finds only two uses that show the scan and that I can inspect; if there were more of them, I would be more inclined to keep. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:39, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete—unless someone can show that this is more significant than "Jump" as in "Press Jump to jump" or "Reload" as in "Press Reload to reload" and so on.--Jtle515 (talk) 23:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

play

 * Keep the button sense of play since there is no WT:CFI-based rationale for deletion and since lemmings (WT:LEMMING) have buttons or controls for stop, pause and rewind. Admittedly, lemmings do not seem to have a button or control sense for play: . --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

pause, Pause

 * Keep the button sense of pause per WT:LEMMING: Macmillan#3 has button; oxforddictionaries.com:noun#1.2 has "control". Do not see how this is a sum of parts; I see not CFI-based rationale for deletion. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:56, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

rewind

 * Keep per and usage like Without even glancing at the paper, I jammed it into my pocket and hit the rewind.
 * Keep the button sense of rewind per DCDuring and WT:LEMMING, although some lemmings do not have button but mechanism; Macmillan has button. The example "press rewind" does not seem to be sum of parts; which parts? --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

stop
Following the deletion of the noun sense of eject which is merely the label of a button on a device, I nominate these co-ordinate entries or noun senses for similar treatment. Please feel free to add other entries, if any. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete all --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 23:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Per utramque cavernam 12:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete all per multiple previous discussions. Equinox ◑ 11:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete all (see Talk:eject for rationales). - -sche (discuss) 04:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep the function sense of stop per WT:LEMMING:M-W:noun#11; keep the button sense of stop per WT:LEMMING: AHD#17 has "control mechanism". Talk:eject does not contain any CFI-based rationale. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:48, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

crouch
Another button. "A button (of a joypad, joystick or similar device) whose only or main current function is that when it is pressed causes a video game character to crouch." I've never heard of a device with a designated crouch button on it, so this would purely be something defined by individual games. Equinox ◑ 17:58, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Abstain as for a button sense of crouch. Does not appear in lemmings (WT:LEMMING): . Furthermore, and  do not find large enough use, to my taste. I guess RFV-sense could lead to deletion of this sense via WT:RFV. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:04, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Inclusion of button symbols
Comment: Would the symbols (the square, the two triangles, etc.) merit inclusion? Purplebackpack89 03:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Just putting your comment into a new subsection to keep it separate from the deletion discussion. — SGconlaw (talk) 03:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Keep all that are attestable. There may be quite a lot of them, but unlike numbers there is not an infinite number of buttons. But to me, "hit the delete" is a commonly heard phrase, and delete here is clearly a noun, and the sense is simply not covered by the verb definitions (though separate entries for capitalised forms seems unnecessary to me: even though most keyboards conventionally spell them that way, I believe this is just a case of using title case as though the labels are the first word in a vocative sentence). Also, these real-world referents will never have entries such as "tab key" or "delete button" in Wiktionary since such are SOP, so they'd never get in. Yet we frequently refer to these keys, so defs for their names seem useful as they are part of the language. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 08:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * To me, "Hit the delete" hardly makes sense. "Hit delete" makes sense, and though I'm sure many people would write it that way, I wonder whether strictly speaking it is correctly written, or whether strictly speaking "Delete" should be capitalised and/or put in quotes or something. The same goes for various other buttons: "Press play", "Press rewind", "Press eject". If these are accepted as correct usage then all these "button" definitions should be kept in my opinion as the nouns are clearly used in a distinct sense. Common sense, rather than blind adherence to attestation rules, should determine which to include, in my opinion. I do not think we need to be troubled by the "wibble" button which is present on some obscure console just because three people on a gaming site wrote "Press wibble". Mihia (talk) 13:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

The OED now has this sense
I am disappointed to report that the OED, as of March 2020, defines delete thus: "On the keyboard of a computer, smartphone, etc.: a key used to delete the character next to the cursor, a selected piece of text or string of...(etc.)". They also have entries for super-SoP delete button and delete key so perhaps not the best example to follow. Equinox ◑ 20:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)